Follow Blog via Email

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 849 other followers

No, He’s Not Hitler—Yet. Trumpism is not Fascism—Yet. And while 63 MILLION AMERICANS voted for this guy, that is only 27 Percent of the voting-eligible population. There is plenty of resistance out there to make sure he doesn’t become Hitler and we don’t succumb to neo-fascism. Let’s get to work.

In a live interview with TODAY's Savannah Guthrie, Christopher Wylie, a former employee of British-based company Cambridge Analytica, says the company misused personal Facebook data of some 50 million people to help influence the 2016 presidential election. Wylie says the company met with former Trump campaign manager (and current outside adviser) Corey […]

Marine life is battling an unexpected enemy, lost fishing gear, also known as ghost gear. 705,000 tons of fishing gear are lost in the ocean every year. Mike Neill and his crew are trying to change that.

Do states have a moral right to exclude people from their territory? It might seem obvious that states do have such a right, but Sarah Fine questions this in this episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast. This episode of Philosophy Bites was sponsored by the Examining Ethics podcast from the Janet Prindle Institute for Ethics at DePauw University. You can su […]

How do I know I'm not dreaming? This sort of question has puzzled philosophers for thousands of years. Eric Schwitzgebel discusses scepticism and its history with Nigel Warburton in this episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast. This episode of Philosophy Bites was sponsored by the Examining Ethics podcast from the Janet Prindle Institute for Ethics at D […]

What is a robustly demanding good, and what has that got to do with friendship and love? Find out in this episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast in which Nigel Warburton interviews Princeton Professor Philip Pettit about this topic.

Philosophers talk about 'knowing how' and 'knowing what'. But what is involved in knowing a person? Katalin Farkas discusses this question with David Edmonds in this episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast. This episode was sponsored by the Examining Ethics podcast from the Janet Prindle Institute for Ethics at DePauw University.

Are human beings fundamentally different from the rest of the animal world? Can what we essentially are be captured in a biological or evolutionary description? Roger Scruton discusses the nature of human nature with Nigel Warburton in this episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast.

The Hard Problem of consciousness is the difficulty of reconciling experience with materialism. In this episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast, in conversation with Nigel Warburton, Anil Seth, a neuroscientist, explains his alternative approach to consciousness,which he labels the 'Real Problem. Anil is a Wellcome Trust Engagement Fellow.

Why does apparently trivial ritual play such an important part in some ancient Chinese philosophy? Michael Puett, co-author of The Path, explains in this episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast. This episode of Philosophy Bites was sponsored by the Examining Ethics podcast from the Janet Prindle Institute for Ethics at DePauw University. You can subscribe to […]

What is Art? That's not an easy question to answer. Some philosophers even think it can't be answered. Aaron Meskin discusses this question on this episode of Aesthetics Bites. Aesthetics Bites is a podcast series of interviews with top thinkers in the philosophy of art. It is a collaboration between the London Aesthetics Forum and Philosophy Bites […]

The process of dying can be horrible for many, but is there anything bad about death itself? The obvious answer is that deprives us of something that we might otherwise have experienced. But that leads to further philosophical issues...Shelly Kagan discusses some of these with Nigel Warburton in this episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast.

We certainly disagree about aesthetic judgments in a range of cases. But is anyone right? Is there no disputing about taste? Are all tastes equal? Elisabeth Schellekens Damman discusses disagreement about taste in this episode of Aesthetics Bites. Aesthetics Bites is a podcast series of interviews with top thinkers in the philosophy of art. It is a collabo […]

Cobalt used to be a byproduct of copper mining, used in everyday, boring stuff like tires and magnets. Now it's one of the most important and sought after metals on the periodic table. This has implications for big tech firms like Apple.

Corporate Crybaby-Callboy

Tom Donohue, head of the U.S. Chamber of Whiners Commerce and the biggest crybaby big-bidness lobbyist in the country, was on The Daily Rundown with Chuck Todd this morning.

Naturally, Donohue was asked about Republicans’ willingness to use the debt ceiling as a negotiating tool and how that might hurt the economy. Donahoe’s biggest worry, of course, is not the economic chaos that flirting with default would bring, but it is our entitlement programs, which, he says, are soon going to consume the entire budget.

I will only post a tiny part of the interview, but before I get to it, I want to show a big, fat graphic that MSNBC put up during the segment:

CHUCK TODD: Corporate profits are up. A lot of corporations have money. Why aren’t they spending that money on creating jobs?

TOM DONOHUE: Well, they have a very serious question—and I hope you’ll do a show on this—the real cliff that’s really scaring us now is the regulatory cliff. They don’t really know how all this Obama health care is gonna go…You look at Dodd-Frank—we’ve only done 25% of the rules—you look at what’s coming out of the EPA, you look at what’s coming out of the Labor Department—

CHUCK TODD: You really believe it’s regulation that is holding business back from spending?

TOM DONOHUE: I think if I’m running a big company, I’m waiting to see what happens on taxes, I’m waiting to see what happens on spending, and I’m waiting to see what happens on the regulatory circumstances. Do I decide two fundamental things: Am I gonna hire more people, am I gonna expand, and where am I gonna do it.

It’s the same old waiting game. Waiting. Waiting. Waiting. The cash is piling up, opportunities are sitting there, but corporations fear regulations, fear having to play by a set of rules that they don’t get to write all by themselves (although they are getting to help write them). Such BS. What a bunch of patriots these bidness people are.

Left out of MSNBC’s graphic on corporate profits, and unfortunately left out of Chuck Todd’s questioning, was this sobering reality, as reported by CNN:

But the record profits come at the same time that workers’ wages have fallen to their lowest-ever share of GDP.

Here is a chart to help us see both corporate profits and workers’ wages as a percentage of the economy over time:

7 Comments

The Chamber of Commerce and greed are the reasons for unemployment and the economic problems in this country. The movement of millions of jobs, especially manufacturing, overseas has caused most of the problems. On top of that, Republicans give the corporate bastards tax breaks for doing it and then get reelected. I am so tired of shills like Roy Blunt repeating this line over and over again while the Chamber and corporate America continue to line his pockets.

I was speaking with a guy the other day who said that “the American workers priced themselves out of their jobs.” He also mentioned the regulations B.S., too. This guy is paid about $9.00 an hour for exhausting work but believes that the unions are the real problems in this country. When I asked him if he supported a minimum wage, he said yes, because his employer would drop his pay if he could. Welcome to SW Missouri, where information is received from conservative newspapers, Fox Noise, the NRA, and the Farm Bureau. When will these ill-informed people wake up and realize that Roy Blunt, Billy Long, William White, the conservstive media, and others do not represent their economics issues. It is so frustrating.

ansonburlingame

If Corporate profits went up by $1 plus Trillion, as shown, then why did GDP only go up a few $10s (or maybe $200) Billion? In other words why did we have such a huge spike in “profits” yet no (or little) effect on economic growth? The last time I checked, one had to SELL much more than $1 to make a profit of $1. Selling is a reflection of a growing economy (GDP), I think.

As for “greed” being the cause of our problems (as claimed by Hight), well do only corporations (which are not “people”?) have a lock on such greed causing our economic turmoil? How, as well, can a “non-people thing” have very human behavior, common to all humans, greed?

I won’t try to argue with how the “curve” above was constructed. Instead I will only ask how to “fix” it. Does taking from (some call it robbing) Peter to pay Paul using government force fix those kinds of things in a supposedly free society? Obviously you all herein call for “regulation”, more of it, which for sure means less “freedom” does it not, at least by “people”, freedom of choices.

Finally, I will offer a “guess” as to why such profits went up. The profits were made “over there”, not here in America (like iPhone profits). Now why did that happen? Probably because, in large part, labor costs only $3 per hour in China but around $80 per hour in America. Change that and watch the cost of an iPhone go through the roof such that few would ever be able to buy one, an iPhone, etc.

All of that is a pretty complex set of variables it seems to me and the solutions are far from simple, like robbing Peter to pay Paul.

As clarification, the corporation’s officers–the CEOs, COOs, Board of Directors, etc.–are the people causing the unemployment and economic problems. Corporations are not people, but if conservatives insist they are, then they should pay “people” taxes and be forced to “people” laws, regulations, and social restrictions.

Anonymous

I have always found the Chamber of Commerce to be somewhat hypocritical. We hear them locally say that we should “buy local” on the radio here in Joplin, but they have no problem with companies going overseas for the cheap labor, as Anson suggests. Now we, as consumers, have various ways to save money, mostly from buying items on the internet. Corporations will always go for cheaper labor, consumers will always go for cheaper products. It seems if the corporations would pay a little more here, them maybe I would be willing as a consumer to buy locally and not on the internet or even traveling to other towns for larger purchases. Unfortunately, unless people overseas will stop working for much less than we consumers can save on the internet, we will be waiting a long time for my desired equilibrium on this matter.

ansonburlingame

You offer “Buy American (only)” goods and services. Great idea but in a free society it doesn’t work and never has. You could put a iPhone, “made in America”, in Best Buy and another, “made in China”. One would cost about $1000 (or more), and the other at the current price of about $400 (or less).

We have seen the same thing with autos, goods at Wal Mart, etc. The free choices by consumers result in what we see today, profits for “over there” goods and services and little earned for such “made in America” (and thus less and less made in America)

The “Hight solution”, actually the union and general Democrat solutions are to “regulate” such choices. Even the ridiculous phrase above, “tax corporations like people” is an attempt to regulate PEOPE, corporate leaders, through the tax code. I suppose Higt and others would attempt, democratically to levy “people tax codes” on businesses (different people).

Go ahead and do so, democratically, and just watch more and more money, “made in America money” fly like bats out of a cave to “over there”!!! But you can “fix that one too” through even MORE regulation. You can “regulate” us till the cows come home in America.

But in doing so, liberty, freedom of choice, is sacrificed as well. Is that the way you want America to “run” today, more and more restrictions on freedom and liberty through regulations?

It is really “simple”, in my view. An economic system is governed by supply and demand.
Democrats want to dictate, through government force BOTH of them. ACA, just as an example now will dictate DEMAND (HC insurance). “Regulate” businesses (real people) through the tax code and you wind up dictating PRICE (by restricting supply) from “over there”).

Keep doing that and we see government force dictating all kinds of things and not a free market. Hello Soviet Union in the extreme and Europe to a lesser degree today. Is that the “traditional” America solution to economic (or even geopolitical) problems, restricting free choice and thus liberty?

Anonymous

Anson, Actually I am just pointing out the hypocrisy of the Chamber of Commerce. On one hand they say we should buy locally. That is fine, but then why would that not work nationally? I purchase more and more over the internet. These purchases mostly come from other states. I am not buying locally if I can find it cheaper on line. However, if I knew of a local company that treated its workers well, I would be more than willing to buy from them. But when they are simply selling products produced over seas, why should I feel obligated to buy them locally?

Jane Reaction

For God’s sake, Anson, tell me you don’t really think our workers make $80 an hour. A day perhaps.
How did you manage to ignore the graphic of corporate profit at $1.7 trillion? They are simply never going to invest in this country. They haven’t since the election of George W. Bush.